Part A.1 – Consider Key Ethical Matters Regarding DPPL and Its Management
Sub part A.1:
In Australia the companies and their operations have to in accordance with the provisions of Corporations Act, 2001. Companies must follow the standard practices in order to comply with the provisions of the act. In addition corporations must also abide by the Environment Protection Laws applicable in the country to protect the environment and ensure that the functions and operations of an organization are not violating the provisions of Environment Protection Law (Schaltegger and Burritt, 2017).
In this case Darwin Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd, here in after to be referred to as DPPL, is a manufacturer of chemical with medium scale of operations. The company is under investigation by the Environment Protection Agency for release of highly toxic waste in the environment during the time of manufacturing process. It is also alleged that the company dumps significant spill of toxic chemicals into a river that is nearby the plant where manufacturing of such chemicals takes place (Schaltegger, Burritt and Petersen, 2017).
Key ethical matters regarding DPPL and its management before accepting the engagement as auditor include the following:
- Is the senior management of DPPL involved in spilling toxic chemicals in the nearby river as alleged by the Environment Protection Agency? If the answer is yes then how much reliance can be placed on the senior management at the time conducting the audit?
- The expected punishment and penalties if the allegations against the company are proved. Whether the company will be able to continue operations in the long run of it is proved that the company has violated the provisions of Environment protection laws (Charter, 2017).
- The impact of such contraventions on the audit procedures to be carried out for conducting an audit efficiently.
The internal controls and securities in relation to each and every aspect of business in an organization is of huge importance for the organization as well as the auditors of the organization. If the internal controls and securities within an organization are efficient then the auditors would be able place significant reliance on such controls while conducting the audit. In this case it has already been ascertained that there is error and control weaknesses in hedging strategy of DPPL (Epstein, 2018). The auditor shall evaluate the error and control weaknesses by the taking the following actions:
- A detailed evaluation of the hedging strategy of the company shall be conducted by the auditor to find out the areas where error and weaknesses lie.
- The possible remedies that can be suggested to the management to improve the hedging strategy.
- The amount of losses that the organization has suffered due to the errors and control weaknesses in the hedging strategy.
- The impact of errors and control weaknesses on the financial reporting process (Saeidi al. 2015).
In case there is limitation in scope of audit an auditor must issue a modified auditor’s report on the financial reports of an organization. As per auditing standard ASA 700 an auditor is required to issue an audit report on the financial statements audited by him. In such report the auditor must express an opinion on the financial statements. In case there is a limitation in scope of audit and the auditor has been unable to collect necessary audit evidence due to any circumstances specific to the organization then, a modified auditor’s report is issued on the financial reports of the organization (Crane and Glozer, 2016).
In this case the audit of Reaction Pty Ltd, a small garage door manufacturer, has been conducted by R David & Associates for the first time. R David & Associates have been unable to corroborate necessary audit evidence to conduct the audit effectively due to lack of documentation of the entity (Rao and Tilt, 2016). Though it has been said that the entity is not preview to audit but the Corporations Act, 2001 provides that even in case of an audit of an organization which is not required to have an audit under the act, all necessary provisions applicable to an audit of an entity under the act are equally applicable to the audit. Since, Reactions Pty Ltd has not maintained required documentation for the auditor to collect necessary audit evidence the auditor of the company has no option but to issue a modified audit report (Voegtlin and Greenwood, 2016).
- Potential threat to independence:
Part A.2 – Identify and Justify Appropriate Response to Errors and Control Weaknesses in Hedging Strategy
As per section 366 of the Corporations Act, 2001 an auditor must be independent of the entity to conduct an independent audit of the financial information of the entity. Declaration of independence by an auditor is one of the primary considerations for an effective audit. Taking into consideration the requirements of Corporations Act, 2001 (the act) for independence of an auditor the potential threats to the independence of an auditor is discussed here for the individual cases (Ioannou and Serafeim, 2015).
An auditor independently verifies the financial information of an entity. The act does not allow an auditor to provide consultancy services that are in nature of maintenance of books of accounts. Since the auditor is to assess the accounting treatments he is not allowed to provide consultancy services in relation to any items of financial reports. Adjusting the amount of impairment will violate the independence of the auditor as it is in conflict with the auditing services (Jaques, 2017).
An auditor receiving the services or purchasing goods from one his clients at normal commercial rates does not contravene the requirements of independence of an auditor. Similarly if an auditor is satisfied with the services provided by his clients at normal commercial rate he as a customer can certainly recommend others to use the services of his clients as a normal customer (Lee et. al. 2016). In both situation there is no contravention with the requirements of auditor’s independence as per s366 of the act. Thus, in this case the independence of auditor of Travel Time Limited has not been compromised even if the auditor has recommended others to use the services of Travel Time Limited.
The Corporations Act, 2001 has made it clear that if any of the following persons has an any substantial interests in an organization then the auditor shall not accept audit engagement of such organizations;
- The auditor himself.
- Any relative of the auditor.
- In case the auditor is a firm then any partner of such firm.
- Any relative of such partner.
- Any employee of such firm (Furnham and Gunter, 2015).
Since, in this case wife of one of the partners of the audit firm has substantial shareholding in Civil Constructions Limited thus, the audit firm should not accept the audit engagement of Civil Constructions Limited as it will conflict with the independence of the auditor.
Audit fees must be paid to the auditor before the issue of the audit report by the auditor. However, an agreement between the auditor and the entity audited can be made to receive such audit fees even after the issue of the audit report. Thus, there is no contravention of any requirements in regards to the independence of the auditor in such case. Here due to cash problems Pleasure Cruise Limited has not been able to pay any part of the audit fees till the tie the audit report is due to be issued. In case the auditor accepts the delay in payment of audit fees there will be no contravention with the independence requirements as per s 366 of the act (Lakis and Masiulevi?ius, 2017).
- Safeguards for matters that affect the independence:
Part A.3 – Determine Appropriate Response to Scope Limitation in Audit
The auditor should not provide any advisory services in relation to calculation of impairment in the financial statements of Hail Pty Ltd.
The audit engagement of Civil Contractions Limited should not be accepted as the audit firm is an interested party.
- Significant changes with AASB 1031 over the years:
Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) always looks to improve the financial reporting quality within the country. AASB 1031 is on materiality and it provides guidelines for the accountants to follow while determining the materiality of financial information. Over the years the standard has undergone number of changes to be relevant according to the changes in time.
First introduced in July, 2004, AASB 1031 was primarily about inclusion of all financial matters irrespective of nature and amount of the transaction. Since then number of amendments have been made to the standards to make it more effective and meaningful to the accounts (Choudhary, Merkley and Schipper, 2018).
As per the compilation details of AASB 1031, Materiality in 2009 information shall be considered material if the omission, misstatement and non-disclosure of such information affects the decision making process of users of financial statements. By amendment in 2009 AASB broadened scope of the standard. To determine whether an amount is material the standard provided use of percentage method. Thus, a particular percentage should be used on certain key parameters such as equity, revenue, and net assets etc. to determine the amount of materiality. With passage of time the importance of materiality of financial information stretched as the auditor started using the standard to conduct substantive procedures on material amounts only (Eilifsen, Hamilton and Messier Jr, 2017).
- Definition of materiality:
The financial information is useful to the users of financial statements only when these are material. Now in order to ensure that only material information is included in financial statement AASB 1031 was issued. However, since the standard stands withdrawn a brief definition about materiality as per the standard would be beneficial to get a primary idea about the reason of its introduction. Materiality as per the standard was defined as information that if omitted, committed or not disclosed in the financial reports would potentially affect the decision making process of users of financial statements. Thus, it is financial information that will help the users of financial statements to correctly assess the performance and position of an entity from these statements (Escobar and Demeritt, 2017).
- Qualitative and quantitative guidelines:
One of the primary reasons for issuing the AASB 1031 is to guide the accountants on qualitative and quantitative aspects of materiality. Thus, in short the standards provides guidelines to determine materiality amount in a financial statements. When it comes to qualitative guidelines all financial information that affects the decision of the users of financial statements are material. In order to determine materiality amount the standard has also provided quantitative guidelines (Hallman, Schmidt and Thompson, 2018). Certain specific percentages can be used on pre-determined yardsticks to determine material amount for different items in financial statements. For example 5% to 10% can be used on revenue, equity, net assets and 2% to 5% on profit before interest and tax to determine material amount for items of revenue, expenditures, assets and liabilities. However, an accountant can modify such percentages depending on circumstances and scenario in different cases (Brooks and Guo, 2015).
Part A.4 – Analyze and Provide Responses to Independent Situations
The concept and constructs of materiality significantly affects the professional judgment of an auditor. ASA 320 is a separate standard that specifically takes into consideration the aspect of materiality in planning and performing an audit. An auditor mainly concerned about the financial information that is material. The substantive procedures conducted by an auditor are only used for items that are material. Hence, the professional judgment of an auditor is immensely influenced by the constructs and concept of materiality. It is only the material financial information that an auditor is concerned about and all the audit procedures are directed towards the items of revenue, expenditures, assets and liabilities if financial statements (Houston, Peters and Pratt, 1999).
- Assessment of materiality post withdrawal of AASB 1031:
A standard guides professional accountants to follow a particular guidelines. In case of AASB 1031 the professional accountants as well as auditors were provided with standard qualitative and quantitative characteristics to determine material financial information. Thus, the standard had a harmonizing effect on accountants as well as auditors as they had to follow the guidelines to determine material amounts in respect of financial statements of different organizations. Though there was scope for the auditor to use his professional judgment for exceptional circumstances but in general the standard harmonized accounting and auditing practices for financial information (Messier, Glover and Prawitt, 2008).
Hence, post withdrawal of the standard there would be significant use of professional judgment to determine items that are material and items that are not material in financial statements. As a result the disparity in accounting treatments and subsequently disparity in auditors’ assessment of misstatement in an audit of financial statements would increase.
Though amendments have been made to AASB 108 to make necessary changes in the previous standard to provide for materiality to ensure smooth transition subsequent to the withdrawal of AASB 1031. However, since the determination of materiality in financial statements subsequent to the withdrawal of AASB 1031 would involve significantly more use of professional judgment by the auditor as well as accountants the disparity between assessments of materiality is bound to increase (Whittington and Pany, 2010).
Sub part C.1:
- Two sources to be sued to gain understanding about Gifts:
ASA 315 requires an auditor conducting audit in Australia to get to know an organization better. In order to understand the environment of an organization and access important information about the organization the auditor should use appropriate sources to get correct information. In case of Gifts the two sources that the auditor shall use to understand the entity and its environment are as following:
Part B – Discuss the Withdrawal of AASB 1031 and Its Impact on Materiality
Financial statements of previous periods: Financial statements of previous periods would help the auditor to gain an understanding about the entity and its operations. Financial statements will provide the auditor information about the financial performance and position of the organization over the years (Scarce, R., 2016.).
Charter of the entity: The charter of the entity such as its Mission and Vision statement will also enable the auditor to understand about primary operations and activities of business. Mission and Vision statement on the other hand will enlighten the auditor about primary business operations that the organization performs.
- Six audit risks and auditor’s response to these risks:
The risk of coordination between 30 specialty gift stores: The Company has 30 specialty gift stores and the risk of coordinating these stores properly to achieve the business objectives is significant. The auditor must check the structure of the company and what leadership method that it follows to manage all these stores.
Inventory management: The company has 30 gift stores thus, managing the inventories in the gift stores and properly account these in the books of account is certainly an area to be given due consideration by the auditor. The auditor should verify the internal controls and securities within the organization with respect of management of inventory (Cao, Chychyla and Stewart, 2015).
Inventory valuation: As per the information provided the inventory is valued at selling prices less an average profit margin. This is not a correct method to value inventories. As per the AASB 102 inventory must be valued at lower of cost and net realizable value. The auditor should check the inventory value to determine the amount of under or overvaluation.
Accounting treatment of refurbishing expenditures: The huge amount spent on refurbishing must be accounted for properly. The auditor should verify the accounting entries recorded for the refurbishing account to evaluate that it has been correctly segregated in capital and revenue expenditures.
Risk in inventory counting: Since the quantity of inventory is huge, there is a possible risk of error in inventory counting. The auditor if possible should be present on the bay of inventory counting if it is not possible he should thoroughly check the counting method to be used by the management.
Change in financial records maintenance: Since the change from store wise accounting to centralized accounting is quite significant thus, there is a risk of error and mistake in centralized accounting as it is new to the staffs. The auditor should check whether necessary training was provided to the staffs to accustom them to work in new accounting environment.
Part C.1 – Identify Audit Risks and Responses in Planning for Gifts Ltd
Transfer of opening balances: The transfer of huge amount of opening balances from 30 stores to centralized accounting system is a possible area of error and fraud. The auditor must ensure that all opening balances have properly been transferred to the centralized accounting system.
The following four factors must be considered by the Finance Director of Gifts before establishing an internal auditor:
The size and structure of business: The size and structure of the business shall be considered at the beginning before thinking about establishing internal auditing system.
The role of internal auditors: The role of internal auditors is significantly different from the role of external auditors. This must be considered before establishing an internal auditor.
Impact on efficiency of business operations: The impact on efficiency of business operations shall also be considered by the Finance Director.
Impact on Internal controls and securities: Internal auditors appraise the internal controls and securities to recommend improvements to these. If there is no internal controls then the internal auditor will recommend establishing internal controls.
References:
Brooks, L.L.Z. and Guo, P., 2015. Audit Firm Tenure, Audit Materiality, and Last-Minute Earnings Management. Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting, 7(1). [Online] Available from: https://web.nacva.com/JFIA/Issues/JFIA-2015-1_12.pdf [Accessed 22 September 2018]
Cao, M., Chychyla, R. and Stewart, T., 2015. Big Data analytics in financial statement audits. Accounting Horizons, 29(2), pp.423-429.
Charter, M., 2017. Greener marketing: A responsible approach to business. Routledge.
Choudhary, P., Merkley, K.J. and Schipper, K., 2018. Auditors’ Quantitative Materiality Judgments: Properties and Implications for Financial Reporting Reliability.
Crane, A. and Glozer, S., 2016. Researching corporate social responsibility communication: Themes, opportunities and challenges. Journal of Management Studies, 53(7), pp.1223-1252. [Online] Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/joms.12196 [Accessed 22 September 2018]
Eilifsen, A., Hamilton, E.L. and Messier Jr, W.F., 2017. The Importance of Quantifying Uncertainty: Examining the Effect of Audit Materiality and Sensitivity Analysis Disclosures on Investors’ Judgments and Decisions.
Epstein, M.J., 2018. Making sustainability work: Best practices in managing and measuring corporate social, environmental and economic impacts. Routledge.
Escobar, M.P. and Demeritt, D., 2017. Paperwork and the decoupling of audit and animal welfare: The challenges of materiality for better regulation. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 35(1), pp.169-190.
Furnham, A. and Gunter, B., 2015. Corporate Assessment (Routledge Revivals): Auditing a Company’s Personality. Routledge.
Hallman, N., Schmidt, J.J. and Thompson, A., 2018. Does Non-GAAP Reporting Result in Less Conservative Auditor Materiality Judgments? Evidence from the UK.
Houston, R.W., Peters, M.F. and Pratt, J.H., 1999. The audit risk model, business risk and audit-planning decisions. The Accounting Review, 74(3), pp.281-298.
Ioannou, I. and Serafeim, G., 2015. The impact of corporate social responsibility on investment recommendations: Analysts’ perceptions and shifting institutional logics. Strategic Management Journal, 36(7), pp.1053-1081. [Online] Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/smj.2268 [Accessed 22 September 2018]
Jaques, E., 2017. Requisite organization: A total system for effective managerial organization and managerial leadership for the 21st century. Routledge.
Lakis, V. and Masiulevi?ius, A., 2017. ACCEPTABLE AUDIT MATERIALITY FOR USERS OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. Journal of Management, 2(31). [Online] Available from: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=583160 [Accessed 22 September 2018]
Lee, S.C., Su, J.M., Tsai, S.B., Lu, T.L. and Dong, W., 2016. A comprehensive survey of government auditors’ self-efficacy and professional Development for improving audit quality. SpringerPlus, 5(1), p.1263. [Online] Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40064-016-2903-0 [Accessed 22 September 2018]
Messier, W.F., Glover, S.M. and Prawitt, D.F., 2008. Auditing & assurance services: A systematic approach. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Rao, K. and Tilt, C., 2016. Board composition and corporate social responsibility: The role of diversity, gender, strategy and decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(2), pp.327-347. [Online] Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-015-2613-5 [Accessed 22 September 2018]
Saeidi, S.P., Sofian, S., Saeidi, P., Saeidi, S.P. and Saaeidi, S.A., 2015. How does corporate social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction. Journal of business research, 68(2), pp.341-350. [Online] Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0148296314002215 [Accessed 22 September 2018]
Scarce, R., 2016. Eco-warriors: Understanding the radical environmental movement. Routledge.
Schaltegger, S. and Burritt, R., 2017. Contemporary environmental accounting: issues, concepts and practice. Routledge.
Schaltegger, S., Burritt, R. and Petersen, H., 2017. An introduction to corporate environmental management: Striving for sustainability. Routledge.
Voegtlin, C. and Greenwood, M., 2016. Corporate social responsibility and human resource management: A systematic review and conceptual analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 26(3), pp.181-197. [Online] Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1053482215300036 [Accessed 22 September 2018]
Whittington, R. and Pany, K., 2010. Principles of auditing and other assurance services.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
